Verizon UWB 5G now covers 2/3 of US population

[mwdewey]

https://www.verizon.com/about/news/v...million-people


Verizon has announced that their 5G UWB service now covers over 200 million people in the US. Here is a map of that coverage as of today, 3/8/23 according to their coverage maps:

[VVivian]

Please switch to calling it "5G UW" to reduce the risk of people confusing Verizon's higher-frequency 5G with the short-range technology UWB.

[cycledude]

Wow that map looks very sad

[mwdewey]

Please switch to calling it "5G UW" to reduce the risk of people confusing Verizon's higher-frequency 5G with the short-range technology UWB.

Sorry, I just copied Verizon's verbage from their PR statement and misinterpreted Ultra Wideband (UW) to be UWB. I do realize that this is not mmWave coverage.

When putting that map together, which was quite a job, I would have to drill down much farther to even get mmWave to even show up. It is such a minor factor in their overall coverage that it's not really worth looking at.

[mwdewey]

Wow that map looks very sad

In a way it does, and when you drill down and find that there are several entire states where they do not have any UW yet it can seem even worse, but really this is all they have to cover to claim 2/3's of the population to be served. Actually, getting to 2/3 is quite an accomplishment when you also have the fact that they are not even allowed to use this spectrum yet across most of the country.

The next 20% will be easy as well, only requiring some more urban areas to be added. It's that final 10% that is the hard part for any carrier, as it involves thousands of smaller communities to be added, and that takes many years to accomplish.

[rpz1]

What is the source of the map? Verizon's website?
Per the map on Verizon it shows my area and the nearby large city having c-band but none that I could find.
Which prompted by question in another thread that no one answered as of yet.
Must a phone have 5G SA capability to pickup c-band n77 if available ?
I have a 5G phone with band n77 and the other lower 5G bands. I only ever see n66 anywhere in the areas the map shows, never n77.
Another thread once mentioned that just because n77 may be there, you may not get it if the network doesn't determine you need it. I'm confused on how that all works.
Thanks.

[CellularCowboy]

https://www.verizon.com/about/news/v...million-people


Verizon has announced that their 5G UWB service now covers over 200 million people in the US. Here is a map of that coverage as of today, 3/8/23 according to their coverage maps:

Well...since I don't work at Verizon anymore ( I love saying that).

The reason why they always put the towers first into major cities is because they can then claim coverage for a massive amount of people at one time. You can put up a few towers in New York and then claim that I provide service for over 8 million people. Even though everyone won't use the towers , they can claim it over the area where it will reach. All the companies do it and its misleading because not everyone lives a major city and think that they need to get that 5G phone. So 200 million people actually just cover the metro areas and much more anything outside it. I live in out in Piedmont, SC and there's no 5G service of any type...just 4GLTE and that's it.

When I see 5G UW in a place like Sugartit, SC...then I'll say 5G is everywhere. The map is accurate and it should have never been shown as its technically giving away trade secrets..lol

[mwdewey]

What is the source of the map? Verizon's website?
Per the map on Verizon it shows my area and the nearby large city having c-band but none that I could find.
Which prompted by question in another thread that no one answered as of yet.
Must a phone have 5G SA capability to pickup c-band n77 if available ?
I have a 5G phone with band n77 and the other lower 5G bands. I only ever see n66 anywhere in the areas the map shows, never n77.
Another thread once mentioned that just because n77 may be there, you may not get it if the network doesn't determine you need it. I'm confused on how that all works.
Thanks.

The map is a composite of screenshots taken of Verizon's coverage maps on their website, all stitched together to create a national map. It shows of course what Verizon CLAIMS to cover, not what they actually cover, which may be different in actual use.

As to whether or not the specific spectrum and service level icon will actually show up on your phone, I don't know anything about that. It may be similar to what T-Mobile does with their mid-band "5G UC" service. I have been to dozens of cities and small towns that supposedly have 5G UC enabled but have never seen the icon on my phone, and there are cities where the instant you get close enough to receive it, the 5G UC icon shows up and stays lit the entire time I am there. There must be some sort of trigger scenario involved but I don't know what it is.

[mwdewey]

Well...since I don't work at Verizon anymore ( I love saying that).

The reason why they always put the towers first into major cities is because they can then claim coverage for a massive amount of people at one time. You can put up a few towers in New York and then claim that I provide service for over 8 million people. Even though everyone won't use the towers , they can claim it over the area where it will reach. All the companies do it and its misleading because not everyone lives a major city and think that they need to get that 5G phone. So 200 million people actually just cover the metro areas and much more anything outside it. I live in out in Piedmont, SC and there's no 5G service of any type...just 4GLTE and that's it.

When I see 5G UW in a place like Sugartit, SC...then I'll say 5G is everywhere. The map is accurate and it should have never been shown as its technically giving away trade secrets..lol

LOL, very good, sorry I revealed such super-secret trade secrets, LOL. I have put together these types of maps for years, for my own amusement and to get a full overall and nationwide picture of a carrier's claimed coverage. It is much more informative than just looking at a small sliver of land area on a coverage website page.

You are right, they try to get the numbers first and them flesh out the coverage over many years. Another tactic they use is installing coverage in New York City and Los Angeles and then claim "Nationwide Coverage",even though there may be nothing in between, something that has always irked me but I fully understand what they are doing.

[rpz1]

The map is a composite of screenshots taken of Verizon's coverage maps on their website, all stitched together to create a national map. It shows of course what Verizon CLAIMS to cover, not what they actually cover, which may be different in actual use.

As to whether or not the specific spectrum and service level icon will actually show up on your phone, I don't know anything about that. It may be similar to what T-Mobile does with their mid-band "5G UC" service. I have been to dozens of cities and small towns that supposedly have 5G UC enabled but have never seen the icon on my phone, and there are cities where the instant you get close enough to receive it, the 5G UC icon shows up and stays lit the entire time I am there. There must be some sort of trigger scenario involved but I don't know what it is.

Thanks. I've gone through the coverage maps on the FCC website too and those show coverage for even land based broadband too (cable, dsl) and they're inaccurate in many areas too. Of course the FCC only knows what the carriers tell them, not an independent assessment.

I have the Cell Network Cell Info app thus I see the band I'm connected to. I never see n77 even in areas I go to that are plastered with it per the maps. Thus my question/confusion if you'll necessarily connect to it even if it's there and your phone supports the band.

[VVivian]

The map is a composite of screenshots taken of Verizon's coverage maps on their website, all stitched together to create a national map. It shows of course what Verizon CLAIMS to cover, not what they actually cover, which may be different in actual use.

As to whether or not the specific spectrum and service level icon will actually show up on your phone, I don't know anything about that. It may be similar to what T-Mobile does with their mid-band "5G UC" service. I have been to dozens of cities and small towns that supposedly have 5G UC enabled but have never seen the icon on my phone, and there are cities where the instant you get close enough to receive it, the 5G UC icon shows up and stays lit the entire time I am there. There must be some sort of trigger scenario involved but I don't know what it is.

Well my understanding is that n41 requires more power to use, both on the client device side and on the network side, so it only activates when the special sauce in T-Mobile's software determines that it's worth the power drain. So maybe in those areas you didn't see 5G UC connect, it was because there was plenty of free capacity on AWS and PCS.

Verizon and AT&T do the same thing with n77, of course, but it ends up being a somewhat different experience because each carrier configures the parameters their network uses for band selection.

[rpz1]

Verizon and AT&T do the same thing with n77, of course, but it ends up being a somewhat different experience because each carrier configures the parameters their network uses for band selection.

So is this basically what you mention about T-Mobiles 5G UC "So maybe in those areas you didn't see 5G UC connect, it was because there was plenty of free capacity on AWS and PCS".
That even though n77 is around, someone may only see n66 (for example) because it has free capacity ?

Where I'm hung up is if a phone is capable, and the band supposedly exists in an area, you may not get it based on what the network feels you need ?
Please explain for my non-tech brain. Thanks much.

[VVivian]

The goal of being connected to the cellular network is to be able to do what you want on your phone. (Yes, I’m stating the obvious.) This requires both a sufficiently speedy connection, and for your battery to not die. Therefore, the algorithms will bump your phone to whichever connection consumes the least battery power while still allowing for data traffic to go through at an acceptable rate.

Generally speaking, higher frequencies use more energy because their higher attenuation requires compensation in the form of higher transmit power; however, when lower frequencies are congested, the calculus can change — the device would need to spend so much time camped out on a lower frequency that it would actually use more power than just switching to a higher frequency. And of course there are some use cases that absolutely require wider channels, such as streaming high resolution video.

As long as you aren’t having to wait for buffering or unusually long loading times, does it really matter to you which frequency you’re using? The only time you’d always get a benefit from using a higher frequency is if you’re on Verizon 5G UW using a plan that deprioritizes LTE and 5G NW data after a certain usage threshold, but AT&T and T-Mobile never treat 5G+ and 5G UC (respectively) data traffic differently than LTE and 5G NW.

[rpz1]

Thanks VVivian. So to get my mind around it in simplest of terms, if a phone is capable, and the band supposedly exists in an area, you may not get it based on what the network feels you need for what you're doing (like a call vs checking email vs streaming a movie) ?

And no, as long as I'm not waiting for buffering or unusually long loading times, it really doesn't matter to me.

Just curious, Thanks again.

[mwdewey]

For comparison purposes, here are composites of AT&T and T-Mobile's current claimed 5G coverage: